Skip to content
Carmelics
TopicsThinkersChangesContributorsLoading account…

    Carmelics

    A reasoning platform. Break down any belief into clear reasons, explore both sides, and weigh the evidence honestly.

    Navigate

    • Topics
    • Search
    • Recent Changes
    • Contribute
    • How It Works
    • Glossary
    • Thinkers
    • Contributors
    • About
    • Statistics
    • Terms
    • Privacy

    Database

    Statements
    —
    Perspectives
    —
    Topics
    —

    Press ? for keyboard shortcuts

    LoyalLoyalJusticeJustice
    Made withinDC&Austin
    Statements
    321,452
    Perspectives
    108,905
    Topics
    42
    Buddhapālita's prasaṅga reasoning implicitly endorses the... — Carmelics
    Home
    HistoryEditSee Inverse

    Part of a larger discussion

    Challenges→Buddhapālita was correct not to state and defend a Mādhyamika thesis

    Buddhapālita's prasaṅga reasoning implicitly endorses the contradictory of the opponent's thesis, making thesis-avoidance logically incoherent.

    ?Rate how convincing each reason is below to see the overall strength.
    1 reason for
    1 reason against

    Reasons For

    1 perspective
    Reason for
    ?
    • 1.Prasaṅga reduces opponent positions to absurdity, logically entailing their contradictory must be true by classical logic.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Buddhapālita claims to avoid thesis-assertion while his reductios depend on negating opponent claims, implicitly affirming alternatives.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.If a position leads to contradiction, rational consistency requires accepting the contradictory; silence on it is logically evasive.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Reasons Against

    1 perspective
    Reason against
    ?
    • 1.Prasaṅga reasoning need not presuppose classical logic; it can operate within non-classical frameworks where contradictories aren't exhaustive.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 2.Showing opponent's view fails doesn't require endorsing any specific alternative—only that something is wrong with their position.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    • 3.Thesis-avoidance aims at transcending conceptual frameworks entirely, not logical coherence by conventional standards of reasoning.
      ?

      Think about whether this reason is strong or weak

    Sign in or register to share your perspective on this statement.

    Next step

    Based on where you are in your exploration

    Strongest counterpoint
    Explore the most compelling reason on the other side.

    Connections

    2 topics

    Truth & Knowledge1 linkedSkepticism1 linked

    Related

    Buddhapālita claims to avoid thesis-assertion while his reductios depend on nega...Buddhapālita was correct not to state and defend a Mādhyamika thesisIf a position leads to contradiction, rational consistency requires accepting th...Prasaṅga reasoning need not presuppose classical logic; it can operate within no...
    +3 moreShow less
    Prasaṅga reduces opponent positions to absurdity, logically entailing their cont...Showing opponent's view fails doesn't require endorsing any specific alternative...Thesis-avoidance aims at transcending conceptual frameworks entirely, not logica...

    Details

    Type
    claim
    Perspectives
    2 (1 for, 1 against)
    Edits
    1 edit